5 thoughts on “So You Want To “Repeal Obamacare,” Do You?”

1. Does this mean Colorado Pols and its Elected Leaders support Obamacare, or only that Repubs are stoopid to say they'll repeal it? 

   Because there is a difference, and as stoopid as R's might be, Democrats did not support it!

   Post-election every critique seems to be interpreted as saying "Clinton would've have won if only, …". I don't know what the Clinton campaign should have done.

   I do know what Democrats should have been/should be doing better generally.

   The first thing is to have simple policy proposals. The complexity of life is sometimes as draining as its expense. And, yes, the back end of any government policy is going to be complicated, that's why you hire people to run the bureaucracy. You don't have the to make it complicated for people to use.

   The second is to take credit for them (or don't pass them if you don't think you should.) Whatever the flaws of Obamacare, there's good stuff in there. The Obama administration touts this stuff but I rarely see other Dems do it.

   The third is to realize that most of the country loves the policies the Washington Post editorial board hates. That's the DC bubble.

   Yet CPols will dutifully supply us with funny GIFS and high-quality photoshop jobs on Trump the next 4  8  years. Bennet didn't support Obama other than superficially. Udall? Ditto. Our congresscritters? I don't know because all I see here is Lamebrain and an out of touch state Democratic organization.

   Bennet and Udall were and are far too worried about the WaPo OpEd page than the people of Colorado, and it shows/showed.

   Log in to Reply

2. Zap, ya know I luvs ya, but wtf are you talking about?

   I agree that both Bennet and Udall, along with most Congresscritters, could have supported single payer (remember Bennet saying ACA was the hill he'd die on? Or at least, lose his seat for?) But "Medicare for All" remains this stunningly simple, efficient, and least costly (to consumers and taxpayers) of all of the health plans out there – yet very few of our elected representatives will back it.

   Medicare for all would  turn the insurance industry upside down. They'd have to shift  from justifying how to deny people care and reimbursement to providing the needed services at the lowest cost (bye big Pharma 30% profit margin). There would be massive "job churn" – but most people employed in the health care industry would still be employed in the healthcare industry. I don't see why the industry should get a bailout when they're so profitable now. But then, I'm not a Republican.

   But Zap, what is this about the Washington Post editorial board?  Did they come out against Obamacare?

   ??

    

   Log in to Reply

3. Gardner us up for re-election in four years.  By that time, we should be able how effective Republicans replacement plans are.  Gardner has all the time he needs to support a better replacement program.

   He can also lie about how much more effective the Republican plan is.  Gosh, I wonder is he will choose lying over doing something for the good of the country.  Time will tell.

   Log in to Reply

4. Gardner us up for re-election in four years.  By that time, we should be able to see how effective Republican replacement plans are.  Gardner has all the time he needs to support a better replacement program.

   He can also lie about how much more effective the Republican plan is.  Gosh, I wonder is he will choose lying over doing something for the good of the country.  Time will tell.

   Log in to Reply

5. Here's a good piece on the procedural options for the Republicans to gut ObamaCare.  It turns out, RyanCare is almost identical to ObamaCare.  Who'd have thunk? 

   In other words, Ryancare is basically Obamacare by another name. This is no coincidence. Health insurance, like any other kind of insurance, fundamentally relies on access to a large, random pool of people. In any given year, the few sick ones are paid for by the large number of healthy ones. But once you tinker with that by allowing healthy people to opt out, the whole system collapses. One way or another, you can save it only by forcing healthy people back into the pool and then providing subsidies to the ones who can't afford coverage no matter what the law requires of them.

    

   Log in to Reply